PC Gamers Reporting Issues With Batman: Arkham Knight - Update

[CrystalShadow]

Spoiler: older things

I wonder If this is going to be related to the graphics card conflict that's been going on for a while. The witcher 3 pc version had such issues.

Uh no, the Witcher 3 thing was an opportunity for AMD to sling as much mud as it could at Nvidia for what amounted to nothing more than AMD being total and utter shit when it comes to releasing updated and timely drivers for new games. Instead of looking in house and asking why community modders were able to fix their drivers and get things like hairworks working it was easier to blame CD Project Red and Nvidia with some made up BS about them being locked out of the code and not having access to the final game code.

Batman on the other hand is just a game that was built for console that has under gone a totally piss poor PC conversion, hence the universe poor performance on all rigs respective of the hard ware it is running on.

What a laughable state of affairs it is that games on PC are basically so poorly coded that the people that write graphics drivers basically have to write a unique driver-side hack for every major game release just to get it to work properly.
It seems like a rather absurd situation, but it's true.
Game devs no longer know how to code properly in a way that is in any way optimal for the hardware. (or sometimes even following basic api requirements). And in the rush to fix this and make their hardware look better, the driver developers have introduced so many hacks and alternate code paths, that even if you did kind of know how to do it right, you'd still mess it up because you cab't predict which particular byzantine combinations of hacks and workarounds your code might trigger, and thus can't be in any way sure what will happen.

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/666419-what-are-your-opinions-on-dx12vulkanmantle/#entry5215019

Just read that for a second, and tell me that sounds like a healthy situation?
Seems we really need vulcan/mantle/whatever... Though then you might just find out just how bad at graphics programming many devs actually are...

Spoiler: many interesting things...

To be fair to developers(and speaking as someone who works on the guts of a game engine every day), it's less "no longer know how", and more like "no one ever knew, and you cannot know it now".

It's been this way for a VERY long time now. Back with the advent of hardware acceleration, and then OpenGL and DirectX, the graphics APIs were designed to make it easier to get things to render as you wanted. However, the hardware manufacturers - as per your linked story - pretty much just hacked things into the drivers, and there's really not much the API creators can do in that aspect. They just call to the drivers and hope for the best.

It gets then compounded further when the APIs themselves can have shenanigans - DirectX tends to be better about this than OpenGL, largely because DirectX will flatly deprecate stuff, while OpenGL as it is has a lodestone around it's neck with legacy support - where you have 2 functions to do the same thing, but one of them has terrible performance on modern hardware and there is no documentation telling you this.

The final layer on top of that is the developer's code itself. This depends on the engine chosen. Pre-existing engines tend to be fairly stable, but can be a huge undertaking to optimize them further if you require it. Rolling your own engine ensures the code does exactly what you want it to do, but is a huge time and money sink that most companies will avoid.

Compounding this further is if the developer picks an engine that has the source restricted or completely locked off, like Unity. This is why Unity has a rap about shoddy performance. The developers don't have source access so they can't correct anything that comes up during development, so they just hope it's good enough to work at launch.

So that's 3 layers of potential obfuscation that actively get in the way of good performance.

With DX12 and Vulkan and Metal(for OSX, as Apple's doing their own thing. Again.), it gives VERY explicit control over 2 of those layers. So in theory, the only reason something would perform like trash is because the developers are either using an existing engine that implements them poorly, or they wrote it themselves and it's terrible.

So even if we find out most graphics programmers are complete and utter garbage, at least we've mitigated 2 layers of the overall problem and we can actually learn how to not be terrible going forward.

Yeah... Sorry. Didn't mean that to sound quite so insulting to game developers. But yeah, the whole combination of all those different layers is quite a tangled mess.

I am an amateur game developer as well, and read a lot of low-level graphics related stuff. But... I also started so far back that part of my knowledge base pre-dates hardware acceleration.
(I have an entire book on writing a software renderer lying around somewhere).

It's easy to see how this turned into a mess when you have so many layers, AND the people responsible for each individual layer all trying to second-guess what the other is trying to do.

The driver tries to guess what the engine code wants, the programmer for the engine tries to predict what the driver will do. The API coders are trying to predict both of these at once (and trying to hide what the driver actually does from the engine developer)

And as you said, 3rd party 'middleware' engines complicate matters even further. The more layers there are (and the more 'hidden' black-box code to deal with), the less comprehensible any of it is to anyone...

Stripping back a few layers may well make certain tasks more difficult to code. But... It sould likely also mean less confusion about what is actually happening behind the scenes.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Oh yeah, both WB and Rocksteady are taking this very seriously. Like how WB took Mortal Kombat so seriously. This time the seriousness was taken to a whole new level which resulted in the port being outsourced to a 12 people console studio. And despite the fact that THEY KNEW the game would be locked at 30fps, WB and Nvidia have released a 60fps video WITH ultra textures (apparently there's a problem with ultra textures rendering) to show us PC gamers how amazing the new Batman game is.

So we should just trust them despite the fact that they're obviously guilty of false advertisement? This is the kind of shit that people should use Steam refund for. Otherwise it's just going to keep happening.

The amount of people in here acting like they did this on purpose is killing me.

So this wasn't done on purpose? 60 fps video that runs all maxed out without any issues whatsoever? The game doesn't look like that and it doesn't run like that either. It's not the footage of the build that is being sold.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mwyrGXBPwI

It's an unfinished game and they knew it. And instead of simply delaying the PC version, they decided to release it in its current unfinished state. They also updated minimum system requirements for AMD GPU's only hours before the game was released. You need an AMD GPU that's almost twice as fast as the Nvidia GPU to "play" the game.

 

[Ralancian]

I've turned the settings down the game still looks pretty hot (honestly i can barely tell the difference) and I've not had a single issue with loss of frame rate to unplayable states since (5-6 hours of pure fun).

Okay my PC is pretty new but it's hardly pushing the boundaries either.

So yeah I'm gonna chalk this one up entitled crybabys.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

So yeah I'm gonna chalk this one up entitled crybabys.

Sure. All those people that can't run the game properly, all those reviewers and all the videos on YouTube and all those facts about framerate cap and many, many other things. All of that comes from crybabies because you can run the game when you turn down the settings.
Jesus Christ man. What the fuck?

 

[Ralancian]

So yeah I'm gonna chalk this one up entitled crybabys.

Sure. All those people that can't run the game properly, all those reviewers and all the videos on YouTube and all those facts about framerate cap and many, many other things. All of that comes from crybabies because you can run the game when you turn down the settings.
Jesus Christ man. What the fuck?

Yeah but this thread has what 3 people who actually own the game complaining? Now how many people do you think on this forum owns the PC version? How many are too busy playing the game to be complaining.?

No the saying the game doesn't have issues just it's quite clearly not the unplayable mess some are making out

 

[Frezzato]

I give it a week before someone identified only by a username posts a solution online. "Fixed it for ya".

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Yeah but this thread has what 3 people who actually own the game complaining? Now how many people do you think on this forum owns the PC version? How many are too busy playing the game to be complaining.?

I don't know, and neither do you. So how's that even an argument? The entire PC crowd over the internet is pretty upset. Just look at the Steam reviews. Hundreds, if not thousands of Steam reviews prove that the game is a complete mess. Some users are reporting that verifying game files deletes the game.

No the saying the game doesn't have issues just it's quite clearly not the unplayable mess some are making out

And then there are things like this: https://youtu.be/GKy2BEHKeyE
That is clearly not playable. This is not what a finished product looks like.

 

[Ralancian]

No the saying the game doesn't have issues just it's quite clearly not the unplayable mess some are making out

And then there are things like this: https://youtu.be/GKy2BEHKeyE
That is clearly not playable. This is not what a finished product looks like.

Max settings....user runs program to capture video which also degrades performance....game has optimisation issues...hardly a surprise.

My computer is less powerful than his so he was deliberately trying to break the game.

My point before is people happy with the game don't complain on day one or even go out to write reviews.

A similar case is Assasins Creed (whatever the latest one was in Paris) I remember reading news reports and people moaning day one about how broken it was. Whilst everyone I knew who actually owned said game reported very few minor issues if at all. The entire gaming player base on the internet mainly contains a bunch of whiny know it alls who like nothing better to ***** and moan.

Like I said though I'm not saying the game doesn't have performance issues on PC as I had them but it just required fiddling with the settings (and frankly most PC gamers have to do that with most games as the in-house benchmarks are usually crap. So most people can probably get the game running in a state where it's more than playable. In a little while it'll be patched and you can turn the settings up to 11.

Personally I'd just rather everyone had some calm rather than freaking out and blowing up a controversy.



On the youtube guy front he's clearly trying to break the game and I suspect most are (afterall they want views)...honestly I'm on a AMD graphics card (and the game is supposedly built for Nvidia) that's not even the latest and greatest out there. So I absoutletly refuse to believe anyone with a semi-decent gaming rig can't get the game to run. Like I said personal experience (of which I believe you have zero?) tells me the game can be played with no noticeable drop of performance for an extended amount of time.

 

[VoidWanderer]

As a console gamer, primarily, I am SHOCKED at the atrocious PC ports. It truly boggles my mind that the main system for making these games, keeps getting shafted. I hope all these bigger developers would take the time to do it themselves and not shovel the workload onto someone else *Cough that sounds like Colonial Marines*. It hurts everybody involved.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

My computer is less powerful than his so he was deliberately trying to break the game.

Oh Jesus Christ. It's like Warner Brothers is paying you or something. What evidence do you have that the game runs fine on your system? There's a ton of videos and user reviews that it doesn't run well on any system, that there are severe performance drops while driving and only you claim otherwise. Even Rocksteady is aware of these issues. Jim Sterling and some other reputable reviewers and critics have made videos and written articles about how messed up this game is. You're the only one who claims otherwise. So why should anyone believe you? One of your arguments was something along the lines of "how many Escapist members own the PC version and are too busy playing". Seriously dude? Seriously? Are you one of those corporate shills that hang around internet forums to spread misinformation?

 

[Ralancian]

My computer is less powerful than his so he was deliberately trying to break the game.

Oh Jesus Christ. It's like Warner Brothers is paying you or something. What evidence do you have that the game runs fine on your system? There's a ton of videos and user reviews that it doesn't run well on any system, that there are severe performance drops while driving and only you claim otherwise. Even Rocksteady is aware of these issues. Jim Sterling and some other reputable reviewers and critics have made videos and written articles about how messed up this game is. You're the only one who claims otherwise. So why should anyone believe you? One of your arguments was something along the lines of "how many Escapist members own the PC version and are too busy playing". Seriously dude? Seriously? Are you one of those corporate shills that hang around internet forums to spread misinformation?

You know what this is waste of my time. If someone with the actual game wants call bullshit on me fair enough I'll bite.

EDIT:
All I'm saying is people can probably get the game running in a playable state. If you set the game to max it's quite clear that's pushing it a bit too much on most if not all machines.

 

[Bat Vader]

My computer is less powerful than his so he was deliberately trying to break the game.

Oh Jesus Christ. It's like Warner Brothers is paying you or something. What evidence do you have that the game runs fine on your system? There's a ton of videos and user reviews that it doesn't run well on any system, that there are severe performance drops while driving and only you claim otherwise. Even Rocksteady is aware of these issues. Jim Sterling and some other reputable reviewers and critics have made videos and written articles about how messed up this game is. You're the only one who claims otherwise. So why should anyone believe you? One of your arguments was something along the lines of "how many Escapist members own the PC version and are too busy playing". Seriously dude? Seriously? Are you one of those corporate shills that hang around internet forums to spread misinformation?

You know what this is waste of my time. If someone with the actual game wants call bullshit on me fair enough I'll bite.

EDIT:
All I'm saying is people can probably get the game running in a playable state. If you set the game to max it's quite clear that's pushing it a bit too much on most if not all machines.

The game is pretty unplayable for me. Next to no graphical options. For the graphical options I wanted to change I had to go into the .ini files to change them. The FPS being locked at 30 is beyond stupid. I changed it to 60 and I turned off motionbluring which helped a bit.

The game doesn't turn into a slideshow anymore when I use the batmobile but it still isn't great. Iron Galaxy messed up royally when optimizing this game.

 

[Ralancian]

Just out of interest what your computer like? Just trying to gauge where the issues are.

My PC is a core i7-4790, 16 gig ram and a Radeon R7 270(I'd have said earlier but I could not remember what my g card was)

Again I've had to turn everything right down but only from the in game menu not touched anything else.

EDIT: 270 NOT 290 stupid auto correct.

 

[Bat Vader]

Just out of interest what your computer like? Just trying to gauge where the issues are.

My PC is a core i7-4790, 16 gig ram and a Radeon R7 270(I'd have said earlier but I could not remember what my g card was)

Again I've had to turn everything right down but only from the in game menu not touched anything else.

EDIT: 270 NOT 290 stupid auto correct.

My specs are an I7-3770K, XFX HD 7970, and 16 gigs of ram. I have all the options turned down to low and the game still gives me fits. I can run The Witcher 3 on Ultra settings without any issues.

 

[Buizel91]

You can no longer buy the game on steam until the problems have been sorted, PC Gamer just posted a new article about it and while the game is still there, u can no longer purchase it.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

You can no longer buy the game on steam until the problems have been sorted, PC Gamer just posted a new article about it and while the game is still there, u can no longer purchase it.

Holy shit it's true: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo1NVshXpyw

I can hardly believe it.

 

[Ralancian]

Just out of interest what your computer like? Just trying to gauge where the issues are.

My PC is a core i7-4790, 16 gig ram and a Radeon R7 270(I'd have said earlier but I could not remember what my g card was)

Again I've had to turn everything right down but only from the in game menu not touched anything else.

EDIT: 270 NOT 290 stupid auto correct.

My specs are an I7-3770K, XFX HD 7970, and 16 gigs of ram. I have all the options turned down to low and the game still gives me fits. I can run The Witcher 3 on Ultra settings without any issues.

This does seam odd....

I'm glad it's been pulled though if were looking at top end graphics cards from merely 3 years ago barely coping and mid to top range from 2 years ago needing to be on minimum settings to be playable. Just wondering how long this will take?

Just as a note mines happy with Dragon Age: Inquisition virtually all on Ultra (have to turn down AA a bit). Can't compare with Witcher 3 don't own it. So yeah it's clear they screwed the pooch on optimisation just odd trying to work where people have issues and others don't.

 

[Tilly]

Why are they treating PC ports like this still in 2015?
I get that the PS4 counts for the majority of sales. But PC can't be that far behind nowadays. They need to stop thinking of it as such.

 

[Buizel91]

Why are they treating PC ports like this still in 2015?
I get that the PS4 counts for the majority of sales. But PC can't be that far behind nowadays. They need to stop thinking of it as such.

PC Generally is harder to port for, you have so many people using out of date systems, and many using high end systems that getting games to run on a huge scale is very hard, as aposed to the console market. At least someone in the world is going to have a problem, whether it be out of date drivers or not having the right specs.

Now admittedly, this was a huge fuck up, either by IG, WB, or even Rocksteady (which i doubt, but then Arkham City wasn't perfect at launch either) and they are definitely going to feel it, if they haven't already. WB and Rocksteady are definitely going to be more careful, they won't want this happening again that's for sure. Rocksteady has had a pretty good run so far, i suppose something was bound to happen eventually.

I wouldn't worry about PC Gaming though, this might just make devs a little more careful when creating a PC port. Or even delaying it for a while. (which tbf, maybe WB and Rocksteady should of done)

 

[Buizel91]

Double post, my bad